Filed: Aug. 31, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1418 PHYLLIS LATKA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. DAVID MILES; NEW HANOVER REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:14-cv-00010-FL) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: August 31, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinio
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1418 PHYLLIS LATKA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. DAVID MILES; NEW HANOVER REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:14-cv-00010-FL) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: August 31, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1418 PHYLLIS LATKA, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. DAVID MILES; NEW HANOVER REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (7:14-cv-00010-FL) Submitted: August 27, 2015 Decided: August 31, 2015 Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Phyllis Latka, Appellant Pro Se. Louis F. Foy, III, WALKER ALLEN GRICE AMMONS & FOY, LLP, Goldsboro, North Carolina; Bonnie Jean Refinski-Knight, HARRIS, CREECH, WARD & BLACKERBY, New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Phyllis Latka appeals from the district court’s order dismissing her wrongful death action for lack of jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Phyllis v. Miles, No. 7:14-cv-00010-FL (E.D.N.C. Mar. 26, 2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
